PDA

View Full Version : Terry Ryan on KFAN



John Bonnes
09-23-2013, 04:22 PM
Terry Ryan was interviewed on Thursday by Paul Allen and dropped some interesting tidbits:

Re: Free agency pitching


"If we're going to do anything here and succeed in the near and long long-term Paul, it's probably no going to be via free agency. It's going to be drafting and international acquisitions and trades and so forth. Very rarely do you end up succeeding because of free agency.

Now when you get to a point where you're very competitive and you're looking World Series area, then you go out and you might end up doing something of that nature. But most clubs, and we're one of them, you're not going to probably get it done via the free agency route. You can certainly compliment your roster. And there will be people out there we'll be aggressively pursuing. There's no doubt we need to go that path on occasion.

But for long-term success, we're going to have to have the Sanos and the Rosarios and the Alex Meyers and Trevor Mays and those types of guys come through. And then all of a sudden you have the opportunity to add a free agent; then you go do it."

It sure sounds to me like we shouldn't expect any big pitching signings this offseason. However, I was excited that "international acquisitions" sprung to his mind as a way to improve the roster.

A couple of other notes;

He says Sano isn't "roster eligible" for another year and a half, which is a year later than I thought.
He claims Sano isn't read defensively more than offensively.
A Gardenhire decision will come down "very close to after the season."
He didn't tip his hand on Gardy. He said he was a big fan of his, but he didn't say that meant he was safe.
Also said he didn't think Ron Gardenhire would step away on his own.
There are major league players that he said didn't have the year he was hoping and he wants to get back on track.
Has a wait-and-see approach on Mauer and wants Mauer's input.


Here it is if you would like to listen to it. The interview starts at the 32 minute mark.

http://www.kfan.com/media/podcast-paul-allen-kfan-fm-1003-KFAN_PADubay/919-hr3-limegroverterry-ryan-23738179/

Badsmerf
09-23-2013, 04:48 PM
Good grief. He has got to go. His aversion to FA is so far out of line that unless the stars align and prospects turn into stars, he will never have a legit contending team. Maybe the international thing is a hint toward Tanaka, but I can't believe it until it happens given his history. He is depressing to listen to when he talks about baseball.

I was excited to see football start. Now the Vikings suck and will be lucky to win a game all season and now I'm looking forward to spring training again.

Seth Stohs
09-23-2013, 04:50 PM
I 100% agree with Ryan on Free Agency.

The Sano roster eligibility info has been on Twins Daily's Rosters & Payroll's page all along. Check out all of Jeremy Nygaard's roster/payroll work here: http://twinsdaily.com/1272-minnesota-twins-roster-payroll-2013.html

Winston Smith
09-23-2013, 05:05 PM
"He says Sano isn't "roster eligible" for another year and a half, which is a year later than I thought."
I'm thinking he means "has to be placed on the 40 man" or he could go in the rule five. He is eligible to be on the roster right now it's just not required so they are saving a 40 man spot for Clete and company.

beckmt
09-23-2013, 05:17 PM
Sano will be here earlier than that. Was is meant is that he does not have to take up a 40 man roster spot at least until the end of spring training next year. Not that the Twins will not have plenty of roster spots this winter.

Seth Stohs
09-23-2013, 06:26 PM
All he's saying is that Sano doesn't need to be added to the 40 man roster until after next season (next November). But, as has been posted above, he will obviously (unless injured) be added to the 40 man roster much sooner. However, there is no reason to add him this November.

Jim H
09-23-2013, 06:34 PM
"If we're going to do anything here and succeed in the near and long long-term Paul, it's probably no going to be via free agency. It's going to be drafting and international acquisitions and trades and so forth. Very rarely do you end up succeeding because of free agency.

This quote by Ryan, I believe this is true. You can find teams that went out, spent massively in the free agent market and had successful years. Rarely if ever, did the success last much beyond a year or 2. Usually if it did, there was a strong home grown nuculeus to build around. I think that is what Ryan is saying and I agree with this approach. I do expect some spending in the free agent market this winter, and I hope it is an impact pitcher. Since, including international free agents, there probably isn't more than 2 or 3 impact (No 1 or 2 starters) starters I don't know how likely my hope is.

cmb0252
09-23-2013, 07:09 PM
While, I'm personally not a fan of most of the free agent arms, I have to agree that whenever Ryan talks baseball it is depressing. If it is about free agents, payroll, Gardy's future, or even his preference on pitcher velocity. Depressing.

Kwak
09-23-2013, 07:24 PM
I love it when the defenders (and the FO) give their spiel dismissing Free Agents. They speak as if free agents are the only players to be added to a roster to improve results. Everyone else is talking about adding less than a handful of them.

USAFChief
09-23-2013, 07:33 PM
I have a vague sense of not liking, or agreeing with, what Ryan had to say.

But it's hard to form much of an opinion, because it's hard for me to understand just what the heck he's saying.

"We're not going to use free agency to get better. Except maybe when we get better, then we'll use free agency to get better. Or maybe not. But we're not going to 'get it done' via free agency. Except we need to make the roster better, so we'll be aggressively pursuing free agents. There's no doubt we need to do that. But long term, we can't get better through free agency, but we might."

His quote would fit right in at a presidential debate.

clutterheart
09-23-2013, 07:34 PM
Sigh
Every time Ryan opens his mouth, the marketing department of the Twins must shudder. Doesn't he get that his current roster is an embarrassment?!?

And you know what really chaps my hide?
Why isn't the media talking about firing Ryan? Why is he untouchable?
The first question he should be asked is "Why is Gardy on the Hot Seat and Not You?"

snepp
09-23-2013, 07:41 PM
I have a vague sense of not liking, or agreeing with, what Ryan had to say.

But it's hard to form much of an opinion, because it's hard for me to understand just what the heck he's saying.

"We're not going to use free agency to get better. Except maybe when we get better, then we'll use free agency to get better. Or maybe not. But we're not going to 'get it done' via free agency. Except we need to make the roster better, so we'll be aggressively pursuing free agents. There's no doubt we need to do that. But long term, we can't get better through free agency, but we might."

His quote would fit right in at a presidential debate.

I really liked this post, except for when I didn't.

TheLeviathan
09-23-2013, 07:41 PM
I have a vague sense of not liking, or agreeing with, what Ryan had to say.

But it's hard to form much of an opinion, because it's hard for me to understand just what the heck he's saying.

"We're not going to use free agency to get better. Except maybe when we get better, then we'll use free agency to get better. Or maybe not. But we're not going to 'get it done' via free agency. Except we need to make the roster better, so we'll be aggressively pursuing free agents. There's no doubt we need to do that. But long term, we can't get better through free agency, but we might."

His quote would fit right in at a presidential debate.

this. But this confusing claptrap says it all to me: there is no clear plan for how to utilize the new revenues. This team still always says they will be used to "retain", not add. Contradictions like this speak to a higher likelihood of the pessimistic predictions coming true.

PseudoSABR
09-23-2013, 08:26 PM
He's hedging his bets, tempering expectations and speaking philosophically about where success is rooted. That said, it's difficult to draw any conclusions from what he's saying.

USAFChief
09-23-2013, 08:48 PM
I really liked this post, except for when I didn't.
Well, I covered the known knowns, and the known unknowns, but I didn't consider the unknown unknowns, so I can understand your ambivalance.

snepp
09-23-2013, 08:56 PM
Well, I covered the known knowns, and the known unknowns, but I didn't consider the unknown unknowns, so I can understand your ambivalance.

My head hurts.

The Wise One
09-23-2013, 10:14 PM
The world of being GM is not a binary system. What you do at one moment might no be what you are doing later. It is not always do this or not do this.

righty8383
09-23-2013, 10:34 PM
While I don't disagree with Ryan's approach to free agency at the present moment, what reason do I have to believe that Ryan will make that big trade or free agent signing when the Twins are competitive again?

TheLeviathan
09-23-2013, 10:46 PM
The world of being GM is not a binary system. What you do at one moment might no be what you are doing later. It is not always do this or not do this.

No, but many executives have a code or system for how they do things. We see that all across sports - some guys are very aggressive. Some guys very passive. Some prefer veterans, some prospects.

The point is, we've seen an awful lot of Ryan and while there may be some argument to be made that he's never been in precisely this situation (an argument I don't buy into in any way whatsoever), there is plenty of very strong supporting evidence to suggest that your "well you never know" argument isn't really accurate.

We know a lot about Ryan. We know a lot about what he looks for, how he likes to build his teams, and how he feels about contracts. The evidence isn't perfect, but it's really, really powerful. You're right that you never know and we may be in for some fantastic pleasant surprises. However, I'm not a real firm believer in the idea that you can teach an old baseball guy new tricks. Or any "old school" sports guys. I think this team has to look for some fresh perspectives and that is going to become very obvious in the next few years.

old nurse
09-24-2013, 06:01 AM
No, but many executives have a code or system for how they do things. We see that all across sports - some guys are very aggressive. Some guys very passive. Some prefer veterans, some prospects.

The point is, we've seen an awful lot of Ryan and while there may be some argument to be made that he's never been in precisely this situation (an argument I don't buy into in any way whatsoever), there is plenty of very strong supporting evidence to suggest that your "well you never know" argument isn't really accurate.

We know a lot about Ryan. We know a lot about what he looks for, how he likes to build his teams, and how he feels about contracts. The evidence isn't perfect, but it's really, really powerful. You're right that you never know and we may be in for some fantastic pleasant surprises. However, I'm not a real firm believer in the idea that you can teach an old baseball guy new tricks. Or any "old school" sports guys. I think this team has to look for some fresh perspectives and that is going to become very obvious in the next few years.

So you think once you turn a certain age you can't learn new things? Talk about insulting a whole class of people.

John Bonnes
09-24-2013, 07:04 AM
So you think once you turn a certain age you can't learn new things? Talk about insulting a whole class of people.

This seems to be a gross over-generalization of Levi's point. I know you two disagree on a few things, but this smells like it is meant to attack rather then address a point, by deliberately misrepresenting him.

Don't do that.

To better define the point being made...
1. It seems all of us, even Ryan, can agree that eventually it might make sense to pay for free agents.
2. But his comments certainly seem to imply that expectations for this offseason should be tempered.

To me, it suggests we shouldn't expect to see him be any more aggressive than he was last offseason, when the Twins were in a similar (maybe even slightly better) position. This year, they spent $8.5M on Pelfrey and Correia. It suggests that we should not expect too much more than that - maybe $10M or so - on a couple of mid-level free agent pitching acquisitions, like a guy coming back from injury and an inning-eater.

Am I being too pessimistic?

Blackjack
09-24-2013, 07:38 AM
"If we're going to do anything here and succeed in the near and long long-term Paul, it's probably no going to be via free agency. It's going to be drafting and international acquisitions and trades and so forth. Very rarely do you end up succeeding because of free agency.

Is anyone really surprised at this??!!!!!! Every time I read a post here on TD that says that the Twins have X amount of dollars to spend and should go after this free agent and that free agent I'm thinking that they're %$@#% dreaming!!! Thatís not the Twins way. Terry Ryan will pick up an innings eater and a couple of projects this winter and thatís it.

launchingthrees
09-24-2013, 07:53 AM
So you think once you turn a certain age you can't learn new things? Talk about insulting a whole class of people.

It doesn't matter if it's insulting. It matters if it's accurate.

TR sounds like my crazy uncle who talks about how cheap kit kat bars were back in the day. He's a dinosaur and every interview he does makes it more clear he's overmatched.

JB_Iowa
09-24-2013, 08:47 AM
"We're not going to use free agency to get better. Except maybe when we get better, then we'll use free agency to get better. Or maybe not. But we're not going to 'get it done' via free agency. Except we need to make the roster better, so we'll be aggressively pursuing free agents. There's no doubt we need to do that. But long term, we can't get better through free agency, but we might."


Is this an actual quote from the interview? I despise listening to podcasts (sorry) and interviews plus the sound on the computer drives my dog absolutely bananas.

When i first read Chief's post, I thought he was being satirical. Did Terry Ryan actually make the statements quoted above?

Thanks.

USAFChief
09-24-2013, 08:57 AM
Is this an actual quote from the interview? I despise listening to podcasts (sorry) and interviews plus the sound on the computer drives my dog absolutely bananas.

When i first read Chief's post, I thought he was being satirical. Did Terry Ryan actually make the statements quoted above?

Thanks.

I took some liberties with paraphrasing.

Maybe.

You can read the actual quote farther up the thread.

JB_Iowa
09-24-2013, 08:59 AM
I took some liberties with paraphrasing.

Maybe.

You can read the actual quote farther up the thread.

Thank you. I take it that the quote in John's original post is accurate.

(I thought I was losing my mind there for a minute -- although some would say it was gone long ago.)

old nurse
09-24-2013, 09:25 AM
This seems to be a gross over-generalization of Levi's point. I know you two disagree on a few things, but this smells like it is meant to attack rather then address a point, by deliberately misrepresenting him.

Don't do that.

To better define the point being made...
1. It seems all of us, even Ryan, can agree that eventually it might make sense to pay for free agents.
2. But his comments certainly seem to imply that expectations for this offseason should be tempered.

To me, it suggests we shouldn't expect to see him be any more aggressive than he was last offseason, when the Twins were in a similar (maybe even slightly better) position. This year, they spent $8.5M on Pelfrey and Correia. It suggests that we should not expect too much more than that - maybe $10M or so - on a couple of mid-level free agent pitching acquisitions, like a guy coming back from injury and an inning-eater.

Am I being too pessimistic?

How can one overgeneralize a generalized statement? The critique is that he is old school. That is an aged based complaint. The complaint is based on what, one off season where he had payroll flexibility? He signed 2 bargain basement free agent pitchers. Judging from the ongoing threads judging last year's free agent pitching his assessments by whatever method worked. He did sign the wrong former Skeeter pitcher to a minor league contract, (Mickey Callaway deserves a coach of the year honor) so Ryan's team didn't do all great work is assessing the talent that was out there. What methods do they use to determine what players to sign? Considering that some of the free agents available had decent years the year before they had to have done some form of projecting. The fans do not know much what goes into the decision making process. So how can you label it old school other than that Ryan is old? True, he doesn't talk metrics. He doesn't talk much specifics on anything that would give you a clue what he thinks.
Ryan works more towards long term than short term. This year should be a kick in the head to remind him that free agents plug short term gaps, too.

Boom Boom
09-24-2013, 09:40 AM
Despite the prospects the Twins are expecting to start arriving in 2014, Ryan sounds like he's going to punt the season again. The Twins really have no one to trade of significant value and Ryan isn't going to sign any major pieces in free agency.

If the Twins are really building something special in the next couple years like they want us to believe, then maybe they should spend some of their burgeoning cash pile to bring in a good pitcher on a multi-year deal that can help not only in 2014 but also onward after that. Worst case scenario, the prospects all flame out and the Twins are still a marginally better team than 2013. There's a possibility that they could always flip said pitcher in a trade anyway.

TheLeviathan
09-24-2013, 09:47 AM
My point was very clearly limited to old school sports guys. Baseball, in particular, has a very rigid old school/new school divide and I think a guy like Ryan has a hard time keeping up with trends much less bucking trends and forging new ground. It's not some kind of knock on old people, it's a knock on rigidity and some of the inflexible thinking we see in baseball quite often.

The Twins under Ryan have been as rigid as any. Sometimes tht pays off and sometimes it severely limits your options. I think we've crossed that bridge into "too limiting" far more than I feel comfortable with.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 09:50 AM
My point was very clearly limited to old school sports guys. Baseball, in particular, has a very rigid old school/new school divide

And there's a whole show on MLB Network based off that exact premise. Reynolds and Kenny facing off.

On top of that, some people take a lot of pride in being 'old school', for whatever reason...or at least unless that phrase is used in a supposed negative manner then all of a sudden it's insulting.

I'm also reminded of a very popular phrase, 'You can't teach an old dog new tricks'. It's been around, forever...

Anyway, back on topic.

JB_Iowa
09-24-2013, 09:59 AM
I don't think free agent acquisitions would make the Twins a contender in the near future (definitely not 2014 and I'm pretty skeptical on 2015) but I keep going back to Nick's statement in his "Dissension on Spending" article: "But there's a large difference between contending and what we've seen unfold here for a third straight year."

In fact, I'd take it a step further: over the weekend Berardino made the following statement in one of his "Twins Now" blog posts on the PP: "[T]he A’s went five straight seasons without even sniffing the playoffs. From 2007-11, they averaged 85.6 losses per season as the big-spending Los Angeles Angels and Texas Rangers ruled the West.Oakland is back, however, even with a dump of a home ballpark and a sub-$70 million payroll that outranks only the Houston Astros among AL competitors.
The Twins and their $80 million payroll can take solace from that example..."

The Twins were 63-99 in 2011, 66-96 in 2012 and, barring a miraculous final spurt, are looking at about 68-94 in 2013. That's about a 96 game losing average over those 3 years.

Even if we average in 2009 and 2010, 2 very good years for the Twins, the losing average is going to be about 86.6 losses per year over a 5 year period.

Does anyone really think that the next 2 years will produce records as good as 2009 and 2010?

I guess my point is that the depth of the futility to which the Twins have sunk is deeper than Oakland -- probably much deeper than Oakland so it is hard for me to take much "solace in that example."

While no one expects miracles over the next year or two, I'd like to think that spending some money in the short run could produce something somewhat more palatable than where we are at right now. I don't want them to do something that will jeopardize a long term recovery but some recognition of the depth of this team's futility would be appreciated.

nicksaviking
09-24-2013, 10:19 AM
So you think once you turn a certain age you can't learn new things? Talk about insulting a whole class of people.

Young nurse agrees with him.

Shane Wahl
09-24-2013, 10:32 AM
I don't understand how anyone can agree with Terry Ryan about free agents??? Unless he is just being vague and saying something obviously along the lines of "free agent signings won't get us a World Series" or "you can't plug every hole with a free agent" then ok. Thanks for the obvious.

But if he is purposefully shying away from the market because of some idea that free agents aren't what the Twins need, then he is woefully mistaken. Without two free agent pitchers to add, that rotation is going to be a ****ing disaster. Correia and Deduno are not going to repeat 2013 performances next year. And the rotation isn't going to be good until Gibson settles in and Meyer and May are up. It still isn't going to be complete and secure until Berrios, Sulbaran, and Stewart are in the mix.

gil4
09-24-2013, 10:40 AM
So you think once you turn a certain age you can't learn new things? Talk about insulting a whole class of people.

As long as that age is over 48 I'm OK with it, for now. Insult away. (That number changes to 49 in a few months and increases by one annually.)

Shane Wahl
09-24-2013, 10:49 AM
Imagine the following scenario: Phil Hughes comes to the Twins on a 2 year deal for 18 million bucks. He becomes a good pitcher (maybe not the hype of 6 years ago when I took a chance on him for my fantasy team and it was terrible . . . ) with an ERA under or near 4. The Twins aren't very good, again, and find themselves selling. And Phil Hughes brings back an older Sulbaranesque (really he's a nice reference point) pitcher and another lower prospect. That's called turning assets over, it's called using free agency not merely as a win-now method of competing, but as a means of getting younger players.

There is no foreseeable future where the Twins are going to take money "saved" this year and next year and spend it in the future. The prospects are going to be cheap for several years now. Basically the spending starts on them when the Mauer contract ends.

So there are two factors in play. Billionaires maximizing profits and Terry Ryan being stuck in an era before inflation. Seriously. It's like he thinks $60 million is what it was 15 years ago or something. And he appears to refuse to go outside of the box. And he got the Correia job done for one year (but one year with him wasn't really the problem . . . ) and so I imagine TR is looking again to strike Correiaesque (another good reference point) gold, er, bronze. I just pray that he doesn't think it is to be found in Pelfrey and the Twins *actually* go about adding no one to the starting rotation.

Aren't the Twins potentially looking at a payroll for 2014 at 50% of what it was in 2011? THIS with a new stadium and a Joe Mauer who gets older . . .

howieramone
09-24-2013, 12:02 PM
I don't understand how anyone can agree with Terry Ryan about free agents??? Unless he is just being vague and saying something obviously along the lines of "free agent signings won't get us a World Series" or "you can't plug every hole with a free agent" then ok. Thanks for the obvious.

But if he is purposefully shying away from the market because of some idea that free agents aren't what the Twins need, then he is woefully mistaken. Without two free agent pitchers to add, that rotation is going to be a ****ing disaster. Correia and Deduno are not going to repeat 2013 performances next year. And the rotation isn't going to be good until Gibson settles in and Meyer and May are up. It still isn't going to be complete and secure until Berrios, Sulbaran, and Stewart are in the mix.

Did you get a chance to read post #3, where Seth posted he agrees 100% with Ryan on Free Agency? I bet if you ask nicely, he will explain it to you.

Several of the young lions on the board grossly misinterpreted, as is their nature, one Terry Ryan quote concluding that he would not spend a single penny on FA's now or forever. Fortunately several of the old school posters were on hand to show them the error of their ways. Indeed Ryan will sign one, if not multiples of free agent starting pitchers this off season.

ashburyjohn
09-24-2013, 12:09 PM
Mod note: Please keep the personal asides out of your comments, everyone. Thanks.

Yossarian
09-24-2013, 12:22 PM
I'm a Ryan fan as well, and agree with him about free agency. It's going to be painful for the next couple years, but that is far more a product of the Bill Smith Era (!) than TR's patience. FA spending or the prospect thereof, in fact, was likely a significant factor in Smith getting a Pohlad's shoe up his pants. Smaller market teams build best from drafts and development. Smith managed the Twins' talent very poorly, and that explains why we are where we are today.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 12:33 PM
I'm a Ryan fan as well, and agree with him about free agency. It's going to be painful for the next couple years, but that is far more a product of the Bill Smith Era (!) than TR's patience. FA spending or the prospect thereof, in fact, was likely a significant factor in Smith getting a Pohlad's shoe up his pants. Smaller market teams build best from drafts and development. Smith managed the Twins' talent very poorly, and that explains why we are where we are today.

The talent put on the field in 2011 and 2012, were mostly Ryan's guys, not Smith's guys cause, if you remember correctly, Smith was only here 4 years. The guys he signed internationally and in the draft hadn't even gotten through the Twins notoriously slower promotion cycle to the majors.

Ryan was also an adviser to Smith. Ryan also picked Smith to succeed him. Ryan also failed to get Hunter or Santana signed to an extension prior to 2007 and then really ticked both of them off when trading Castillo. Then he bailed and left the mess for Smith.

To put this all on Smith's shoulder's is wrong....and darn him for actually spending the % of funds available to try and make the team better...I mean, how dare he follow through with the whole premise of the reason we needed a new ballpark, for more revenue to compete and then actually spend it. You're right, no wonder Pohlad fired him...

nicksaviking
09-24-2013, 12:42 PM
Imagine the following scenario: Phil Hughes comes to the Twins on a 2 year deal for 18 million bucks. He becomes a good pitcher (maybe not the hype of 6 years ago when I took a chance on him for my fantasy team and it was terrible . . . ) with an ERA under or near 4. The Twins aren't very good, again, and find themselves selling. And Phil Hughes brings back an older Sulbaranesque (really he's a nice reference point) pitcher and another lower prospect. That's called turning assets over, it's called using free agency not merely as a win-now method of competing, but as a means of getting younger players.


Agreed. Ryan himself says he doesn't feel free agents can help the Twins rebuild and he wants to do it with prospects. Well how do you get prospects? The draft and through trade. The Twins have next to nothing to trade right now, so use free agency to sign guys who have a possible profile of a tradable asset. Noodle armed swing men like Kevin Correia never had a chance of bringing back a return. The Yankees couldn't get anything for Hughes this season but he does have the pedigree and name where a turnaround season would give him considerable trade value.

There are plenty of players on the market who may not be able to singlehandedly turn the club around in 2014 but will be valuable to competitive teams come next July. Of course the Twins still may have to be willing to eat some salary.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 12:47 PM
Agreed. Ryan himself says he doesn't feel free agents can help the Twins rebuild and he wants to do it with prospects. Well how do you get prospects? The draft and through trade. The Twins have next to nothing to trade right now, so use free agency to sign guys who have a possible profile of a tradable asset. Noodle armed swing men like Kevin Correia never had a chance of bringing back a return. The Yankees couldn't get anything for Hughes this season but he does have the pedigree and name where a turnaround season would give him considerable trade value.

There are plenty of players on the market who may not be able to singlehandedly turn the club around in 2014 but will be valuable to competitive teams come next July. Of course the Twins still may have to be willing to eat some salary.

And he's not likely to trade prospects to acquire proven MLB talent either. From another article:

'To address all the shortcomings, Ryan might have to get creative. His one area of strength is his farm system. The Twins can covet their prospects all they want, but no team has seen all its top 10 prospects thrive in the majors. Is Ryan willing to trade prospects for established talent? For the right deal, is he willing to move one of the mega prospects such as Buxton or Sano for pitching?

“Depending on who you are talking about and the situation and all that, if something comes up like that where someone presents something like that, we will take it all under consideration and see what the ramifications are,” Ryan said.'

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/224966352.html?page=2&c=y

amjgt
09-24-2013, 12:47 PM
Terry Ryan seems to view free agency as a way to fill out a roster/pitching staff rather than improving a roster/pitching staff.

Nobody is asking TR to use free agents to completely overhaul the roster/pitching staff, but we are too far away from competitive at this point to be flippantly ruling out ways to get us back to respectability.

John Bonnes
09-24-2013, 01:02 PM
OK, so two questions, just to be a little more specific....

1. Will the Twins spend more than $11 million dollars on starting pitching in the free agency market for pitchers next year?
2. Will the Twins staring pitching rotation rank any better than 26th in ERA next year?


After reading Ryan's comments, I think I'm going to say "No" and "No". And that second "no" feels like a gut punch. 2014 would be the fourth year in a row that would be true. I'm all for patience, but c'mon.....

I'll add one more...

#3. Is that acceptable?

("No. Not to me.")

amjgt
09-24-2013, 01:07 PM
I agree with Shane Wahl above, where free agents can be used (flipped) to acquire young talent. The obvious model for this is the Cubs.

The common first response to this is "we don't have the financial capabilities of the Cubs." While that is probably true, they started the year with a payroll a little over $100mil and with all of the trades they made, they look to be down in the $75 mil range (for a 2013 net payroll of $80-90mil)

That sounds like a place where even Terry Ryan would admit we are comfortable.

There are a myriad of reasons why a team might find themselves with payroll flexibility (lots of young players, new influx of revenue, tanking, etc). Not using that flexibility to improve your organization is what is truly the most frustrating thing for a fan to stomach (at least this fan).

We stink. OK
We're tanking. OK
We had injuries. OK

We're saving money. Not OK

big dog
09-24-2013, 01:11 PM
Well, I covered the known knowns, and the known unknowns, but I didn't consider the unknown unknowns, so I can understand your ambivalance.

Any discord will be dismissed as coming from the nattering nabobs of negativism.

Shane Wahl
09-24-2013, 01:43 PM
OK, so two questions, just to be a little more specific....

1. Will the Twins spend more than $11 million dollars on starting pitching in the free agency market for pitchers next year?
2. Will the Twins staring pitching rotation rank any better than 26th in ERA next year?


After reading Ryan's comments, I think I'm going to say "No" and "No". And that second "no" feels like a gut punch. 2014 would be the fourth year in a row that would be true. I'm all for patience, but c'mon.....

I'll add one more...

#3. Is that acceptable?

("No. Not to me.")

The answer is no, no, and no, it would appear. It's hard to imagine a scenario where 1. is a no and no. 2 is a yes. Maybe if Hughes (or the equivalent) was the one signing and he had had an excellent season.

SpiritofVodkaDave
09-24-2013, 01:48 PM
I'm not sure why everyone is freaking out, Ryan is simply saying he doesn't believe you can build a contender through free agency alone, and he is correct. The only team that is bucking that trend this year is the Dodgers, who frankly have shown they don't care one iota about money, the other teams that have tried it: Angels, Yankees, etc have all done very poorly. Free agency should be a way to improve your team in areas, but at the end of the day its always going to be all about home grown talent and shrewd trades that take you to the top (along with some GOOD free agent signings)

I think Ryan realizes he needs to spend money this off-season and next, a couple 3-4 year deals for good to very good players, and another 2-3 solid players for 1-2 years is what we should aim for. Spending 150 mil on ANYONE at this point is not going to be in this teams best interests.

Let's look at the playoff teams:
Boston Red Sox: Actually they got bailed out big time by the Dodgers last year and got a ton of money and bad contracts taken off the books. The majority of their key contirbutors this year are now home grown players, or key signings (see: Ortiz several years ago)

Detroit: The core of this team was put together in very nice trades: Miggy, Fister, Scherzer, etc along with a few key free agent signings: Prince, Sanchez. Plus the whole having Verlander in your system never hurt as well :)

Tampa Bay: Built from within, smart trades.

Cleveland Indians: Def not a team built through free agency.

Texas Rangers: Built from within, smart trades, a couple key FA signings but nothing crazy (Beltre+Nathan)

Atlanta+Pitt+Cin+STL

All very good franchises, again they made some key signings in FA (without going over board) and made good trades and built from within.

The Dodgers are literally the only team who took the whole "Lets spend a bunch of money on players right now" approach, and it wouldn't shock me if the whole thing goes belly up in 3-4 years ala the Yankees.

Jim Crikket
09-24-2013, 02:34 PM
OK, so two questions, just to be a little more specific....

1. Will the Twins spend more than $11 million dollars on starting pitching in the free agency market for pitchers next year?
2. Will the Twins staring pitching rotation rank any better than 26th in ERA next year?


After reading Ryan's comments, I think I'm going to say "No" and "No". And that second "no" feels like a gut punch. 2014 would be the fourth year in a row that would be true. I'm all for patience, but c'mon.....

I'll add one more...

#3. Is that acceptable?

("No. Not to me.")

1: Maybe. I think $11 million is not a bad place to put the over/under. It's about what I expect him to spend on pitching in free agency (unless it turns out he gets really creative/lucky in the trade market).

Face it, none of the top-tier arms are going to come to Minn for any price. The time to lure one or more of them here was a couple years ago when you might have been able to convince them there was enough offensive talent to compete behind them. That's no longer the case. Nobody will be tripping over themselves to sign with the Twins this offseason, especially not on a short term (1-2 year) deal.

John, in the interview Ryan gave you last year, he seemed to say he recognized a need to fish in the FA waters, but didn't feel those waters were as deep as you (and many of us) believed. (Based on results, it turns out he was right, by the way.) Maybe he's taking the opposite tack this year... saying publicly he won't be looking to do anything significant in FA, lower expectations, and then if he can make a deal, great. Frankly, that approach is much more Ryan-esque than what he was saying a year ago.

2. Probably not by much. Even with some moderate FA help, the Twins are going to have to get lucky to improve their numbers a lot among SPs. Maybe a young guy or two bounces back with a better season. Maybe a former star SP on a make-good contract actually makes good.

3. No, it's not acceptable. I'm just becoming more and more convinced it's also not avoidable. By not supplementing the home grown roster with legitimate MLB talent, especially pitching, the past couple of years, the opportunity to remain competitive while you wait for the young prospects to arrive and develop in to big leaguers was missed. The hole may just be too deep to dig out of in less than three more years at this point.

John Bonnes
09-24-2013, 03:10 PM
I'm not sure why everyone is freaking out, Ryan is simply saying he doesn't believe you can build a contender through free agency alone, and he is correct.

I think most agree with the point that a contender can't be built through free agency alone. But I also think that Ryan is saying quite a bit more than that.


I think Ryan realizes he needs to spend money this off-season and next, a couple 3-4 year deals for good to very good players, and another 2-3 solid players for 1-2 years is what we should aim for.

This is where I think we disagree. His quotes, to me suggest nothing of the sort. He seems to be suggesting that now is not the time to spend money on free agents. That the time to spend money on free agents is when all the other pieces are in place. That is, I think, the question.

There are several good reasons to look at free agent acquisitions in the meantime.
1) To give fans a more competitive product.
2) To have assets to move at the trade deadline.
3) To raise the bar for accountability for other players.

I'm legitimately intrigued as to why you think we can expect him to spend "good money" this offseason and how you define "good money". I can't imagine any 3-4 year contracts. Are there some statements I haven't seen that suggest that line of thinking from Ryan?

Alex
09-24-2013, 03:14 PM
I'm not sure why everyone is freaking out, Ryan is simply saying he doesn't believe you can build a contender through free agency alone, and he is correct. The only team that is bucking that trend this year is the Dodgers, who frankly have shown they don't care one iota about money, the other teams that have tried it: Angels, Yankees, etc have all done very poorly. Free agency should be a way to improve your team in areas, but at the end of the day its always going to be all about home grown talent and shrewd trades that take you to the top (along with some GOOD free agent signings)

I think Ryan realizes he needs to spend money this off-season and next, a couple 3-4 year deals for good to very good players, and another 2-3 solid players for 1-2 years is what we should aim for. Spending 150 mil on ANYONE at this point is not going to be in this teams best interests.

Let's look at the playoff teams:
Boston Red Sox: Actually they got bailed out big time by the Dodgers last year and got a ton of money and bad contracts taken off the books. The majority of their key contirbutors this year are now home grown players, or key signings (see: Ortiz several years ago)

Detroit: The core of this team was put together in very nice trades: Miggy, Fister, Scherzer, etc along with a few key free agent signings: Prince, Sanchez. Plus the whole having Verlander in your system never hurt as well :)

Tampa Bay: Built from within, smart trades.

Cleveland Indians: Def not a team built through free agency.

Texas Rangers: Built from within, smart trades, a couple key FA signings but nothing crazy (Beltre+Nathan)

Atlanta+Pitt+Cin+STL

All very good franchises, again they made some key signings in FA (without going over board) and made good trades and built from within.

The Dodgers are literally the only team who took the whole "Lets spend a bunch of money on players right now" approach, and it wouldn't shock me if the whole thing goes belly up in 3-4 years ala the Yankees.

Why do people think that when some people suggest the Twins spend more money, they are recommending they spend like the Dodgers, or that they want the Twins to spend $150M dollars on a player?

There are teams on your list that I would say spent in FA that would be "overboard" by Ryan's standards. (Tigers and Rangers as the most obvious)

SpiritofVodkaDave
09-24-2013, 03:27 PM
I think most agree with the point that a contender can't be built through free agency alone. But I also think that Ryan is saying quite a bit more than that.



This is where I think we disagree. His quotes, to me suggest nothing of the sort. He seems to be suggesting that now is not the time to spend money on free agents. That the time to spend money on free agents is when all the other pieces are in place. That is, I think, the question.

There are several good reasons to look at free agent acquisitions in the meantime.
1) To give fans a more competitive product.
2) To have assets to move at the trade deadline.
3) To raise the bar for accountability for other players.

I'm legitimately intrigued as to why you think we can expect him to spend "good money" this offseason and how you define "good money". I can't imagine any 3-4 year contracts. Are there some statements I haven't seen that suggest that line of thinking from Ryan?

It also stands to reason that Terry Ryan has no reason to tip his true hand, the Twins have never been one to have a bunch of rumors and stuff leak, (which actually though it makes for boring speculation, its a good thing), while not tipping his hand and somewhat managing expectations Ryan is doing what most good GMs do (besides the Yankees and Dodgers)

Just remember how quickly (and quietly) the Span and Revere trades came together last off-season?

Shane Wahl
09-24-2013, 03:41 PM
If Terry Ryan is simply "not tipping his hand" or is stating an obvious fact like "you cannot win through free agency alone" then good grief. I do think that those are #2 and #3 of most accurate interpretations of what he has said. I get the impression that he will see free agency as merely a way to FILL the starting rotation with one pitcher this offseason.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 03:52 PM
Span and the Nats were linked for like two, three years...the shocking thing is it didn't happen earlier, it was certainly no shock that it happened.

ChiTownTwinsFan
09-24-2013, 03:55 PM
Span and the Nats were linked for like two, three years...the shocking thing is it didn't happen earlier, it was certainly no shock that it happened.

Actually, I was surprised. When it didn't happen earlier, well, thought it wouldn't. Then, boom, done, gone.

ashburyjohn
09-24-2013, 03:57 PM
I agree with Shane Wahl above, where free agents can be used (flipped) to acquire young talent. The obvious model for this is the Cubs.

The problem with making this part of your strategy, is you have to outbid 29 other teams to do it. And then when it's time to flip him, you can have 29 teams replying "I didn't even want him at that price, free and clear. Now I need to give you a prospect for the right to pay him that same salary?"

Yes, of course such trades do get made, for a variety of reasons such as key injuries, but the obstacle is still there if you're truly basing your strategy around the idea. How much could the Twins get for Correia or Willingham? For that matter, how much could their respective teams get for Greinke or Anibal Sanchez? The Feldman trade looks to me to be about the best you can hope for, and the downside to the strategy is if you acquired Willingham only to be a trade chip after a year, and have him end 2012 disabled instead and a shell of himself in 2013. On average, I think, the strategy won't fill up the farm system with very many prospects.

IdahoPilgrim
09-24-2013, 04:01 PM
Span and the Nats were linked for like two, three years...the shocking thing is it didn't happen earlier, it was certainly no shock that it happened.

One could make the case that it was allowing the move to drag out that allowed the Twins to get someone like Meyer in return. I seriously doubt (though I could be wrong) that his name was mentioned the first time Washington approached the Twins.

And just because pundits or journalists are mooting a possible trade does not mean it was actually in the works.

And certainly no one (or very few people) expected Revere to go so quickly afterward.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 04:04 PM
One could make the case that it was allowing the move to drag out that allowed the Twins to get someone like Meyer in return. I seriously doubt (though I could be wrong) that his name was mentioned the first time Washington approached the Twins.

And just because pundits or journalists are mooting a possible trade does not mean it was actually in the works.

And certainly no one (or very few people) expected Revere to go so quickly afterward.

Semantics aside, Span getting trading to the Nats wasn't a surprise was my point. Would have been a bigger shock if he hadn't been at least traded.

Revere trade was a huge shock.

nicksaviking
09-24-2013, 04:07 PM
The problem with making this part of your strategy, is you have to outbid 29 other teams to do it. And then when it's time to flip him, you can have 29 teams replying "I didn't even want him at that price, free and clear. Now I need to give you a prospect for the right to pay him that same salary?"


Well it's like playing the stock market. You need to speculate a few buy low guys who have clear upside thus an ability to sell higher than when you bought them. Correia, Pelfrey, Carroll and Doumit are not the kind of players who can accomplish this. You need to go after low floor/high ceiling guys. Ryan seems to try to avoid the boom or bust scenario by going after high floor/low ceiling guys. However, as it keeps turning out, these seemingly safer free agents actually have a pretty low floor themselves.

As to the last sentence, the Twins refusal to eat salary has been talked about a ton. I guess if they are unwilling to do so, this kind of free agent flipping is probably always going to be a problem for them.

Siehbiscuit
09-24-2013, 04:10 PM
It seems everyone has a different interpretation of Ryan's quotes. To me, it sounds like FA is a very low priority compared to the other 5 ways to acquire players. The factors as to why this ranks low on his priority list is to me the question that should be asked.

1) Maybe he doesn't like signing 30+ because at that age they are more likely to breakdown.
2) Maybe at 30+ years old he feels he's paying for prior performance, not future performance.

I don't disagree, but if he never "swings" the FA "bat" he will never hit a game-winner. Nearly all of his FA signings are for low-risk, low-ceiling (even low-floor) and low reward type of guys. The boldest moves he made was a VERY cheap incentive laden deal for Rich Harden.

Siehbiscuit
09-24-2013, 04:15 PM
In a different article I suggested a couple of candidates to target in FA. One of them being, Ubaldo Jimenez at 5/65. Others suggested that BRef has him listed in the 3/$39M range ($13/yr). For the Twins to compete, risks like Jimenez (not for sure him but as an example) need to be taken. Someone else will give him a 4 year deal, the Twins are NOT an attractive destination for players to want to come to. Adding an extra year or two needs to be done as a risk, as a marketing of sorts to other FA's that we are an organization that is serious about winning. Sometimes an investment in a player is more about making a statement than just that one specific player (see Joe Mauer's contract).

All that said, Ryan won't stretch the wallet and get outside his comfort zone.

Willihammer
09-24-2013, 04:25 PM
The problem with making this part of your strategy, is you have to outbid 29 other teams to do it.

I wonder about that. The sense I get from the FO is that they consider the sign-and-trade a backwards way of dealing. But if I were Bartolo Colon, Hiroki Kuroda, or A. J. Burnett, I'd probably jump at a 1 year deal to a rebuilder who tells me up front "if we're not in the wild card race at mid-season, then we're going to trade you into a pennant race for prospects."

beckmt
09-24-2013, 04:36 PM
If you look how the FA pitchers came out this year, Ryan did OK. I hit and a couple of misses, one very low risk. Now he needs to make some bigger moves, but most of the top FA pitchers will probably not come here, without overpaying them by a lot. So you keep trying, and hope to hit a few homeruns. I do hope Josh Johnson is one of the pitchers signed, and then sign another older pitcher for 1-2 years or a younger one (Lincecum if not qualified) for 3 or more.

SpiritofVodkaDave
09-24-2013, 04:48 PM
I wonder about that. The sense I get from the FO is that they consider the sign-and-trade a backwards way of dealing. But if I were Bartolo Colon, Hiroki Kuroda, or A. J. Burnett, I'd probably jump at a 1 year deal to a rebuilder who tells me up front "if we're not in the wild card race at mid-season, then we're going to trade you into a pennant race for prospects."
AJ Burnett has said he is staying in Pittsburgh, also I doubt any pitcher really sees that as a great thing, in fact I think its the opposite, major leaguers are humans like the rest of us, nobody wants to up and move (especially with a family) in the middle of the year, also this is why they often want no trade clauses and long term deals (of course money is always huge) but never underestimate the value of "knowing where you will be"

Shane Wahl
09-24-2013, 04:55 PM
The problem with making this part of your strategy, is you have to outbid 29 other teams to do it. And then when it's time to flip him, you can have 29 teams replying "I didn't even want him at that price, free and clear. Now I need to give you a prospect for the right to pay him that same salary?"

Yes, of course such trades do get made, for a variety of reasons such as key injuries, but the obstacle is still there if you're truly basing your strategy around the idea. How much could the Twins get for Correia or Willingham? For that matter, how much could their respective teams get for Greinke or Anibal Sanchez? The Feldman trade looks to me to be about the best you can hope for, and the downside to the strategy is if you acquired Willingham only to be a trade chip after a year, and have him end 2012 disabled instead and a shell of himself in 2013. On average, I think, the strategy won't fill up the farm system with very many prospects.

You first say "making this part of your strategy" and then say "if you're truly basing your strategy around the idea." Those two statements do not match. I am advocating for the former, and not the latter. The idea behind signing free agents is first and foremost to get good players who can stay and contribute (which is why I *really* don't like a one-year deal for any of these guys unless there is an option year--and guys signing a one-year deal are less likely to like the option) for 2014, to 2015, and gasp, 2016. But secondarily, if the option arises, trading those assets for young talent (and, at this point, that hopefully means A+ or AA talent) is then *part* of the strategy.

Now the point about the outbidding and salary:

1. Teams who the Twins would be trading to are likely looking to win that year. Now maybe in the offseason it wasn't clear how competitive said team was, but by the end of July that picture is more clear.

2. The Twins would have already forked over the majority of 2014's salary to the player (and if the Twins were ballsy, they could offer to pay the rest of 2014's salary . . . but alas . . . that is highly doubtful given this GM).

3. All sorts of things can happen that make your scenario sketchy. Maybe the team simply preferred another player in the offseason and regardless of whether or not they got him, they might be looking now (at deadline) for the Twins player. Also, of course, there is the injury issue or other roster transactions that create a need.

Willihammer
09-24-2013, 05:51 PM
AJ Burnett has said he is staying in Pittsburgh, also I doubt any pitcher really sees that as a great thing, in fact I think its the opposite, major leaguers are humans like the rest of us, nobody wants to up and move (especially with a family) in the middle of the year, also this is why they often want no trade clauses and long term deals (of course money is always huge) but never underestimate the value of "knowing where you will be"

I get that, but some guys will change teams this year, for the prospect of more money and/or a better shot at the World Series. After all, that's why no one will sign here (or so its said) - we're not likely to be competitive, so is it still wise to cultivate this reputation as a team that won't trade anyone mid-contract?

If Bartolo Colon gets another $3m offer from the As, a $6m offer from the Angels, and a $10m offer from the Marlins, then my guess is he will pack his bags for one of the two other places. But if the Twins come in and say "we'll match the $6, and in 6 months trade you to a team with a minimum winning percentage .xxx (barring the Twins aren't themselves competitive)" wouldn't that be at least a little appealing? I'm assuming these sort of limited no-trade clauses can be worked out, maybe they can't.

old nurse
09-24-2013, 06:13 PM
I get that, but some guys will change teams this year, for the prospect of more money and/or a better shot at the World Series. After all, that's why no one will sign here - we're not likely to be competitive, so is it still wise to cultivate this reputation as a team that won't trade anyone mid-contract?

If Bartolo Colon gets another $3m offer from the As, a $6m offer from the Angels, and a $10m offer from the Marlins, then my guess is he will pack his bags for one of the two other places. But if the Twins come in and say "we'll match the $6, and in 6 months trade you to a team with a minimum winning percentage .xxx (barring the Twins are themselves competitive)" wouldn't that be at least a little appealing? I'm assuming these sort of limited no-trade clauses can be worked out, maybe they can't.

So if the team is viewed as non competitive, why would they sign here?
Bartolo Colon has career earnings of 75 million. Why would a couple more million with an offer to be traded make the least bit of sense. It doesn't make any sense.
Teams don't sign players to trade them. Where do fans get this notion? You can name players traded. Name one signed with the idea they would be traded to a contender if it wasn't working out. Name one who was stockpiled like a brick of gold. Teams trade away the free agents when things don't work during the season, or after if it appears like it is a never will work situation. On the Cubs caravan, Seuvm and Epstien were reported as saying they expected to contend with the additions they made. A rotation like they had, decent position players, it was a believable line.
From an interview with an author
Dale Sveum says he feels more comfortable heading into his second season as the Cubs manager. Coming off a 101 loss season, he’s got high expectations.
“The one thing you hate doing is saying, ‘[finishin] .500 will be good,’ because it’s not good,” Sveum said Wednesday. “It’s not 101 losses, but .500 isn’t getting you to the playoffs. Just getting in the playoffs is satisfactory. … In a perfect world, if [Matt] Garza and [Scott] Baker are ready to go Opening Day, its not a bad staff to have [Jeff] Samardzija, Garza and [Edwin] Jackson at the top and the other guys in the four, five spots. Fujikawa would come in the eight inning, Marmol in the ninth, there’s so many things that are so much better going into this season than last year. [Finishing] .500 is, like I said, still not acceptable.”
Garza and Baker will both be ready to go in Spring Training but Sveum said the team may take a cautious approach with them to ease them into the regular season. Garza is coming off an elbow injury and Baker is coming back from Tommy John surgery.
The Cubs in the playoffs in 2013? That might be hard for some fans to consider but Sveum thinks they have enough firepower if Ian Stewart is healthy, and Nate Schierholtz produces.
“You can’t fall victim to, ‘Yeah, we are obviously in a transition in the organization, and we’re trying to get healthy and do all this,’ but don’t fall into the category that we can’t win right now,” Sveum said. “Baseball is a funny thing. Just last year, we close out some games in April and the start of the season is a lot different and you never know what happens after that. You might not have the exact same bullets as the guy actross the street, but all you need are guys to play up to their capabilities and have a starting staff and close out games, and you win a lot of games.”

Thrylos
09-24-2013, 06:18 PM
Bartolo Colon will be an overweight 41 year old juiced pitcher. As far as he is concerned, I am with Terry Ryan: I'd pass.

Alex
09-24-2013, 06:46 PM
If you look how the FA pitchers came out this year, Ryan did OK. I hit and a couple of misses, one very low risk. Now he needs to make some bigger moves, but most of the top FA pitchers will probably not come here, without overpaying them by a lot. So you keep trying, and hope to hit a few homeruns. I do hope Josh Johnson is one of the pitchers signed, and then sign another older pitcher for 1-2 years or a younger one (Lincecum if not qualified) for 3 or more.

He acquired one pitcher who performed above expectation but was still a below average pitcher. This could be labeled a OK if the Twins weren't still the worst rotation in the league or had just been looking for a capable fifth starter.

Brandon
09-24-2013, 07:26 PM
How shocked would everyone be if Pohlad showed up at the Winter Meetings to facilitate an ownership mandated FA signing like Lincecum or another high end starting pitcher? I could almost see this as something planned to bring about fan interest this winter. the stage has been set with Pohlad saying we can spend the money and Ryan saying lets wait....

stringer bell
09-24-2013, 07:38 PM
I was listening to Dan Barreiro on KFAN. He said the LENIII had interviewed Ryan and that Terry had categorized the 3-$21M as a huge contract. While most considered the Willingham deal a middle of the road deal, if Ryan considers it huge dollars, the Twins just will not pursue and offer enough to attract a top tier or second tier free agent. It has been my concern that Ryan is still operating in the 20th Century both on what he considers a rich free agent contract and how much he is able and willing to spend. The Twins don't have to live on leftovers and scraps any more. They have middle market revenues and the prospects of rich revenue streams. If this is truly Ryan's view, Pohlad should retire him.

ThePuck
09-24-2013, 07:46 PM
I was listening to Dan Barreiro on KFAN. He said the LENIII had interviewed Ryan and that Terry had categorized the 3-$21M as a huge contract. While most considered the Willingham deal a middle of the road deal, if Ryan considers it huge dollars, the Twins just will not pursue and offer enough to attract a top tier or second tier free agent. It has been my concern that Ryan is still operating in the 20th Century both on what he considers a rich free agent contract and how much he is able and willing to spend. The Twins don't have to live on leftovers and scraps any more. They have middle market revenues and the prospects of rich revenue streams. If this is truly Ryan's view, Pohlad should retire him.

I posted the link to that story on here already.